[Mark]

I'm one of those guys that usually updates to newer versions of software only when compatibility issues force me to. I have strived to make all newer versions of Windows look and act like the good old Win98. Same thing with Internet Explorer. I'm attached to the clean uncluttered screen with just a few buttons and drop-down menus. I don't care for fancy graphical interfraces and lots of whiz-bang bars and helpers.

But I got tired of all the messages from websites telling me my "old" IE8 browser needs to be updated for full use of their pages. So I took the chance and updated to IE9. What finally convinced me is after reading up on the pros and cons, I see that some of the things that I had to change through registry hacks for IE8 are now contained in menu options of IE9. So it was very easy to disable unwanted default features such as tab browsing, tool bars, search bars etc....

I'm happy that it seems to have been a painless upgrade. The new font used doesn't seem to be a detractor so far.

[TerminX]

Why the hell would anyone be using old versions of IE for any kind of daily use? That's just a really, really poor idea, and so is only upgrading to newer versions of anything when compatibility issues force you to.

[Mikko]

Mark., on 04 July 2013 - 07:43 AM, said:

I'm attached to the clean uncluttered screen with just a few buttons and drop-down menus. I don't care for fancy graphical interfraces and lots of whiz-bang bars and helpers.

Ever heard of Chrome?

[Kathy]

IE10 was out long time ago...

[Mark]

If it's not broke don't fix it. With my limited browsing habits I couldn't see a problem that needed fixing by an upgrade other than getting rid of those annoying "update" messages. Probably 90 percent of my browsing time is spent here, Youtube, Ebay, Craigslist. The other 10 percent of misc browsing has been almost trouble free. I didn't feel the need to be on the cutting edge of technology for that.

I automatically dismissed Chrome because of all the hype that it can do this and do that which all sounded like clutter and bloat for features I don't use. Plus a look at screenshots of it in action showed tabbed browsing and tool bars. I never even researched beyond that. And I didn't even realise there was an IE10. I could be wrong but I'm going to assume its optimised for mobile device usage. I have no mobile devices and thus no use for any features for them.

If I run into a lot of incompatibilty issues later on with IE9 I'll update to the least different alternative to what I have. I'm old. I'm supposed to resist all this new-fangled stuff of the younger generation. Heck, I don't even own a cellphone or ipod.

[Kathy]

Mark., on 04 July 2013 - 09:08 AM, said:

If it's not broke don't fix it.

With my limited browsing habits I couldn't see a problem that needed fixing by an upgrade other than getting rid of those annoying "update" messages.

Who needs fixing exploits, right?

Quote

And I didn't even realise there was an IE10. I could be wrong but I'm going to assume its optimised for mobile device usage. I have no mobile devices and thus no use for any features for them.

Quote

If I run into a lot of incompatibilty issues later on with IE9 I'll update to the least different alternative to what I have. I'm old. I'm supposed to resist all this new-fangled stuff of the younger generation. Heck, I don't even own a cellphone or ipod.

Updating software has nothing to do with acquiring new hardware.

[Mikko]

Mark., on 04 July 2013 - 09:08 AM, said:

I automatically dismissed Chrome because of all the hype that it can do this and do that which all sounded like clutter and bloat for features I don't use. Plus a look at screenshots of it in action showed tabbed browsing and tool bars. I never even researched beyond that.

Well of course they're gonna advertise all the new features. The fact remains that Chrome looks and feels much more stripped down than IE for example, even though it's not.

[Mark]

Cathy, on 04 July 2013 - 09:50 AM, said:

Who needs fixing exploits, right?





Updating software has nothing to do with acquiring new hardware.

deleted in case I misunderstood your post

And the reference to hardware was to help illustrate my pattern of resisting change.

TX: I said I "usually" wait to update because of compatibility issues. Not "always". I have a couple games and graphics programs I upgraded because they had new features I deemed to be desirable. With the IE8 browser it didn't really look or feel like I was missing out on anything for how I use the internet so there was no urge to update. As simple as that.

The embarassing part of this thread is that I started it because I thought IE9 was still the new version. If I would have realised it was so old I would have kept it to myself.

[Fox]

If Windows Genuine Advantage is a "critical update", anything is possible.

Mikko_Sandt, on 04 July 2013 - 10:34 AM, said:

Well of course they're gonna advertise all the new features. The fact remains that Chrome looks and feels much more stripped down than IE for example, even though it's not.

Microsoft products are filled with the most useless features mankind could cultivate. It's not a problem to have a browser with only what you need.

[Kathy]

Mark., on 04 July 2013 - 11:09 AM, said:

The embarassing part of this thread is that I started it because I thought IE9 was still the new version. If I would have realised it was so old I would have kept it to myself.

You can still create "IE10 is OK" topic.

[Hank]

TerminX, on 04 July 2013 - 08:16 AM, said:

Why the hell would anyone be using old versions of IE for any kind of daily use? That's just a really, really poor idea, and so is only upgrading to newer versions of anything when compatibility issues force you to.

Way back when I had Windows 98, I experienced a crash, and trying to recover, the prompt wrote, error, can't access IE4. It was looking for the IE version that came bundled with the original OS, and could not use the installed upgraded IE 5 version to start the recovery process. So I called Support, they checked the mess, and said, you need to start from scratch. That was a lot of fun. - The peeps at MSDN explained and assured me that this no longer applies. Still, I will forgive anyone not upgrading IE , there are enough other browsers out there to have access to the latest web tools and features.


@ Mark, IE 10 was designed for Windows 8 in mind, methinks, and IE10 for 7 came out just a view month ago, and shows little difference, it just seems a bit quicker. Either way, try Google Chrome, and since I am drunk, use 2 ducks to search.

[Person of Color]

I don't think Mark likes little boys, so he shouldn't worry about Google tracking him.

I swear to God Duck Duck Go runs off stolen software from AltaVista. It's just terrible.

[Alan]

IE9 is not a "good browser." It's an improvement over 8, but it still has a lot of problems (such as not supporting about half the Javascript API), and as long as it holds market share, it will also hold back development.

[Kathy]

486DX2, on 04 July 2013 - 06:51 PM, said:

I don't think Mark likes little boys, so he shouldn't worry about Google tracking him.

Because that's the only reason you should worry about.

[gibfrag]

Mark., on 04 July 2013 - 07:43 AM, said:

I'm one of those guys that usually updates to newer versions of software only when compatibility issues force me to.

I get that. Seriously. I hate it when they update interfaces, forcing you to leave the current ones behind (like YouTube).. However, updating because it fixes bugs or adds new features I'll usually update it immediately (like EDuke32). I always check and see what the updates contain, and if there's nothing I disagree with, then I update. I made a big mistake updating my Itunes a few months ago. Everything I knew about Itunes received a different look.. It pissed me off so much.

[Mr.Deviance]

Mikko_Sandt, on 04 July 2013 - 08:18 AM, said:

Ever heard of Chrome?

Yeah, it's the shittiest browser next to opera. I sure did hear about it...
Firefox works perfectly these days.
Using IE or Chrome or Opera is just because you are a hipster or a noob with browsers.

[Inspector Lagomorf]

Mr.Deviance, on 05 July 2013 - 01:44 PM, said:

Using IE or Chrome or Opera is just because you are a hipster or a noob with browsers.

So... 72% of the Internet-using public?

[Hank]

486DX2, on 04 July 2013 - 06:51 PM, said:

I don't think Mark likes little boys, so he shouldn't worry about Google tracking him.

I swear to God Duck Duck Go runs off stolen software from AltaVista. It's just terrible.

http://duckduckhack.com/
go ahead and make it better then,
Simply consider me another 2DuckGo pimp.

@ Mr. Deviance - Chrome, IE, Safari and FireFox, are always improving, it's getting harder (for me anyway) to tell their real differences. Ergo if Chrome is for hipsters, FireFox is for FireFox fans.

[Person of Color]

Moose Man, on 05 July 2013 - 08:15 AM, said:

I get that. Seriously. I hate it when they update interfaces, forcing you to leave the current ones behind (like YouTube)..

Oh man, that new YouTube layout. What a piece of shit. I swear to God it's designed for 800x600.

It looks like a middle schooler's Angelfire web page from like 1998. Half my fucking monitor is unused at 1920x1080 and all the videos are either full screen, or to the left, to the left...

[MusicallyInspired]

Ah YouTube. I recall when the change first happened and they altered the index page. There was a few of us who kept figuring out obscure urls to access the old index which was much cleaner and perfectly laid out. One by one they removed these backdoor exploits until the old index was truly gone. Hated that. Still do. Frickn mobile support crap....*is typing this post on cell phone*

[xPreatorianx]

Fox, on 04 July 2013 - 11:09 AM, said:

If Windows Genuine Advantage is a "critical update", anything is possible.


Microsoft products are filled with the most useless features mankind could cultivate. It's not a problem to have a browser with only what you need.

Windows Genuine Advantage is a critical update because MS are trying to determine whether your copy is legal or not. Therefore they will of course label an anti-piracy mechanism a critical update. That makes complete sense from a business perspective.

Hmm... MS hater eh? I haven't had a single problem with MS. Well besides Vista. But I did my research on vista before I even decided on the purchase. Which I didn't buy it to begin with. As it was a retail beta because MS couldn't get longhorn out soon enough and didn't want all the OEM's suing them. Then longhorn got completely scrapped and 7 was born. Longhorn was supposed to be a completely different OS then anything we have seen before. People think Windows 8 is radically different? Longhorn was going to be a complete reboot on the entire OS. But because of the sheer amount of work that entailed, MS couldn't meet their contractual deadlines with the OEM's and thus Vista was born. Then they decided to use Vista as the basis for 7. Which is basically a combination of Windows XP and Vista. At least all the good stuff of both OS. Plus a lot of additional improvements.

For people who don't know - MS is required to release another OS every 3-5 years. I believe it's 3. It's a contractual obligation between them and all the various OEM's.

But back to your comment - Windows isn't inherently bad nor bloated in my opinion. Yes some features people never use. But for the most part it's a pretty damn good OS and I haven't had a single problem with it. But than again, I know my way around Windows so I know how to prevent the more serious problems that plagues a lot of Windows users. (BSODS, etc) Plus I know how to remove a lot of the bloat. Oh and on top of that I have a modern computer for highend gaming so the "bloat" doesn't even affect me to begin with.

But I also like Linux as well. Mac - screw that OS. Apple have made it their mission to make OSX compatible with only an extremely limited range of hardware. So I'll never use OSX just for that reason alone. PC's are supposed to be all about choice. Not constricted piles of crap. If I want a locked down system, I'd just use my gaming consoles as a PC.

PS: Windows 8 is also a pretty decent OS as well. It's got a lot of performance improvements over 7. I love it. People complain about the Metro UI but it's because they are too damn lazy or too ignorant to spend 5 seconds in google to figure out how to set the OS to boot straight into the Windows 7 desktop or IDK....hit WINKEY + D. Then to fix the issue of no start menu, they can grab a freeware start menu replacement which will again set the OS to boot straight into the Windows 7 desktop environment. As the Metro UI is only an additional UI layer on the OS. It's not required to be used.

EDIT: It's like saying you are required to install/use GNOME/KDE/etc in order to boot your Linux machine into a CLI only interface.

[xPreatorianx]

EDIT: Sorry didn't realize I dual posted.

[Kathy]

Sometimes I wonder why most software increases its system requirements. I can understand that about games, but not about Office. Sure, it has more functions and everything, but shouldn't with every version become faster and more optimised? It's a business application, it shouldn't be so bloated for a business PC.

[Mark]

Them giving increased requirements might be a marketing ploy. Just my opinion because I haven't run any of their business software over the years.

[Hank]

^ I just picked up some bread, meet eight or nine people, all with their phone in their hands, not sure how many used IE10 on it. Yet, they are the majority, and be it Androit, iOS or Windows, they use it.

[personal rant]
In the fifties, engineers had a huge u shaped desk and did their building analysis with pen and paper. In 2010s, engineers have three or four screens and do it on Windows 8; with a lot of cool software running simultaneously. Even so I missed my Windows 7 with multiple-windows-and-one-monitor at first, the new way is actually friendlier to use, no clicking around, I can touch the screen and change curves with a pen, see the resulting numbers on another screen, I still can send final data straight to my old fashioned cell phone, etc - not bad.

Is it a marketing ploy? Not sure. Fact is, 8 is here to stay. I either go back to the 50s or move along with the 2010s.
[/personal rant]

[Inspector Lagomorf]

Hank, on 07 July 2013 - 09:00 AM, said:

[personal rant]
In the fifties, engineers had a huge u shaped desk and did their building analysis with pen and paper. In 2010s, engineers have three or four screens and do it on Windows 8; with a lot of cool software running simultaneously. Even so I missed my Windows 7 with multiple-windows-and-one-monitor at first, the new way is actually friendlier to use, no clicking around, I can touch the screen and change curves with a pen, see the resulting numbers on another screen, I still can send final data straight to my old fashioned cell phone, etc - not bad.

Is it a marketing ploy? Not sure. Fact is, 8 is here to stay. I either go back to the 50s or move along with the 2010s.
[/personal rant]

Your argument is a perfect example of a false dilemma. There's nothing on Windows 8 that you can't already do on Windows 7, and Windows 7 is nothing if not optimal for multiple monitor support.

[Hank]

^ Yes, absolute correct!!! But my rant is for business only. I can deduct this, justify higher fees, so I use MS as an excuse to make - ehmm -- to make a higher profit.

[Person of Color]

Windows 8 is shit. I shouldn't have to do that much modification to Windows 8 out of the box, including editing the fucking registry to get a proper, clean, shutdown. Also, Metro is fucking terrible. I don't care if there's a start menu replacement, Metro is an abortion and it totally shows how clueless Microsoft is these days. It's not an issue of being "lazy," it's a piece of shit, end of story. It's like Ford saying "Dude, I've got an idea. Let's put the blinker switch INSIDE the center console. Oh, and let's put the stereo on the passenger side." That's what Microsoft did. Who cares if that new Mustang is fast if you get cramps trying to drive it?

I could install Windows 7, OS X, and like a billion different flavors of Linux and I wouldn't have to tweak jack shit out of the gate, because the UI isn't terrible and they don't run in perpetual retard mode.

[Hank]

what an irony
When Windows 95 came out you've had a hard time pressing the power button to shut the comp down. You needed to close all programs and then click another three times to shut Windows itself down. And then Windows 95 gave you a nice screen - Windows 95 is shutting down. With Windows 8, one can click on the Power button again, and it shuts down.

[Kathy]

Did I miss irony?